Science and technology

Tablet computers

Fire in the hole!

STEVE JOBS famously dismissed the notion of a seven-inch (18cm) screen as neither fish nor fowl as such awkward gadgets began to dribble out in 2010. Roughly 3.5 inches and ten inches, he declared, were ideal. Unsurprisingly, those are the sizes of his iPhone and iPad, respectively. Jeff Bezos, the boss of Amazon, was not convinced. Having sold millions of six-inch, grey-scale Kindle e-book readers, Mr Bezos bumped the size up a bit and added colour—and may have created the first viable alternative to Apple's slate. The Fire is no iPad clone, either, as many other tablets tried, largely unsuccessfully, to be. Rather, just as Apple did with the iPad, Amazon creates a whole new niche, which it then fills.

Your correspondent purchased a Kindle Fire, which arrived on November 16th, and was immediately struck by how versatile and enjoyable it is to use. The Fire, which set your correspondent back $199, less than half the price of the cheapest iPad, was always intended for consuming media and playing games, rather than creating and manipulating content. There is no microphone or camera. (Bizarrely, volume-control buttons are also missing, and the power button is inconveniently placed at the bottom centre.)

After hours of use, Babbage found that, indeed, it shines brightest when playing video and pumping out audio. Reading is not as pleasant an experience as on Kindle's original E-Ink display; even the iPad's larger back-lit screen and the more recent iPhones' "Retina Display" are kinder on the eyes, even though the Fire's resolution almost matches the iPad's. This may be down to the way in which the edges of type are rounded and spaced across pixel boundaries using shades of grey and colour. In any case, it seems a bit blurry.

Early reviewers carped that the Fire was sluggish, and its web performance poor, especially compared to the iPad 2. That Babbage did not share this impression may be thanks to a last-minute operating system update that was required when first powering up the device. Once updated, the Fire was not perky, perhaps, but nor was it painfully slow. Some on-screen buttons did not respond unless tapped right in the middle and firmly, and swiping and dragging have a noticeable delay compared to an iPad. But that delay, even after hours of use, did not niggle as it does on other Android-based tablets.

As for the online experience, Amazon promoted its browser, named Silk, as streamlining the retrieval of web pages. And a good thing it did. Otherwise, the delay would no doubt be truly horrific. It is slower than an iPad, but pages nonetheless load up promptly and properly. Silk is supposed to learn which pages people commonly visit as it gathers data over time from Fire users, and will anticipate your paths before you click, making it zippier still.

One big difference between the iPad and the Fire was that the latter was shipped preloaded with Babbage's Amazon account, and thus linked to all of the digital purchases he ever made on Amazon, as well as music uploaded to its Cloud Drive, divided neatly into categories like newsstand, video, music and books. The appropriate aisles of Amazon's digital store load by default in each tab. Purchases past and future can be also downloaded onto the device or streamed from the cloud. The process is so simple that one might expect Apple to have come up with it. (Accessing content on the iPad is incomparably more finicky.) The streaming option is particularly nifty, especially since the Fire boasts little storage—just 8 gigabytes, compared with an iPad's 16, 32 or 64 gigabytes.

The device's first iteration includes only Wi-Fi. A 3G option is no doubt in the offing, but the cheap, subscription-free Wi-Fi version is an easier sell at Christmas. (Amazon offers 3G versions of some of its Kindles but the mobile fees it pays to carriers are built into the cost of buying books and periodicals; with the Fire, mobile-broadband consumption will be much higher, requiring mobile subscription.)

Amazon has one last trick up its sleeve. By default, apps can only be downloaded from Amazon's own App Store. Throw a simple switch, however, and software from any source may be installed. Apple has always frowned on such consumer choice, a stance it is showing no signs of modifying—and why should it, as it has so far served the company perfectly well.

For all that, the Fire is not an iPad killer. But nor does it need to be. Mr Bezos has built a clever little gizmo which, especially at its low price, may yet put a dent in Apple's dominant, even overweening position. Consumers can only benefit.

It's been so amusing to read all the reviews that compare the Fire to the iPad. From size to price to operating system to web browser to app selection, the differences are stark. Not quite as bad as comparing apples to oranges, but maybe like comparing bananas and plantains.

I don't own either. To make my own highly questionable comparison, the netbook I bought a while back for less than $400 has tech specs that stomp most tablets (although the upcoming generation of tablets have better CPUs). Then again, its screen is 11.6 inches, it weighs over 3 whole pounds, it has a physical keyboard and trackpad, and it runs plain Windows 7. So it's like bringing a gun to a knife fight.

@Reido: True, but not comparing would leave most readers wondering why the lemur is winding its way around an elephant's legs without discussing the pachyderm. It's a different beast, and will eventually establish itself as thus.

The Fire is bad news for Android tablet makers: compete at the low end against a company that has a huge amount of content subsidizing the gadget price and compete at the high end against Apple. Amazon will make money on the Fire through content sales, but Samsung can't do that.

I love my iPad. I do my work on it. I couldn't do that on a Fire. It's also much better for watching video, both in screen size - and resolution - and also since I have 64 gigs and have a pile of stuff on it. The Fire works great if I'm in a reliable wifi network, but I don't need to watch a small screen in my house and wifi networks aren't reliable most places. (Like yesterday, the guy next to me in a coffee bar was skyping to what sounded like Russia and he and the other users made the network repeatedly stumble even for loading audio.) The larger iPad screen is totally immersive watching Kurosawa's Stray Dog while my wife is watching American Pickers, but I don't usually sit with my tablet by myself when I'm with my family.

We are upgrading our kindle to the new one - not the Fire - because that annoying page blink has been moved to every 5 or 6 pages now.

I have nothing against the Kindle. I think the stories about it as an "Android" tablet and as an "iPad killer" have been ridiculous. I'm disappointed in the way Amazon brought out the Silk browser; the feedback that it's slower isn't going to help sales. Haven't they been seeding their cloud?

Or you can go into setting tab and uncheck a single box and then nothing is routed through amazons servers at all. It acts like a totally normal browser. But its slower that way, and the reason amazon invented silk (which has been done many times before) is they have great cloud computing history and the fire is not going to win any spec wars.

They have been very clear about this. This isnt apple tracking you or google picking up your wifi signals. They have been VERY clear about it.

"As for the online experience, Amazon promoted its browser, named Silk, as streamlining the retrieval of web pages. And a good thing it did. Otherwise, the delay would no doubt be truly horrific. It is slower than an iPad, but pages nonetheless load up promptly and properly. Silk is supposed to learn to which pages people commonly visit as it gathers data over time from Fire users, and will anticipate your paths before you click, making it zippier still."

Silk outsources a great deal of the data processing involved in web browsing to Amazon's centralized servers. This does "streamline" the process but also allows Amazon to access user's private data. Stolen credit card numbers aren't much of a concern, but "user preference" tracking, as Amazon so famously does on its sales website, will now make the browsing traits of all fire users equally useful to Amazon.

Texas Republican Joe Barton expressed outrage about the browser at a public hearing this week, while Massachusetts Democrat Ed Markey pressed Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos for some answers about what his company will do with the data collected from Silk users.

"My staff yesterday told me that one of our leading Internet companies, Amazon, is going to create their own server and their own system and they're going to force everybody that uses Amazon to go through their server and they're going to collect all this information on each person who does that without that person's knowledge," he said.. "Enough is enough.

I work selling such devices for a Canadian retailer, and I can assure you that this is accurate, likely down to Gutenberg having to fight against the scroll's in-born advantage of not having to turn pages.

You also need to compare because not people are not going to be carrying one of everything: a smartphone, small tablet, large tablet, netbook etc. People are making choices. Kindle Fire is a threat to the iPad because, on the whole, people who buy the Fire won't buy the iPad.

It will compete directly with the Ipad though, because the Ipad capabilities are far beyond what the average person uses it for. The Fire will cover everything that a typical person will use it for and at a lower price. The number of people that actually need an Ipad for it's full capabilities is exceedingly small.

Very clear? The Terms and Conditions say, "We generally do not keep this information [user information] for longer than 30 days." I would say this is vague.”

I don't claim to have cracked a conspiracy. Just thought it odd TE is plugging kindle fire without mentioning the several congressional inquiries that have been made into the privacy concerns and the NY times article that came out about how silk, "may give Amazon unique insight into the Web clicks, buying patterns and media habits of Fire users” and how "longer term, Silk will monitor consumer behavior, and Amazon's machines will predict from past behavior where a customer is likely to go next."

I just think it’s important that consumers know that they’re data is being accessed, much like Rep. Edward Markey, co-chair of the Bi-partisan Congressional Privacy Caucus, said in a statement:

"Consumers may buy the new Kindle Fire to read '1984,' but they may not realize that the tablet's 'Big Browser' may watching their every keystroke when they are online. As the use of mobile devices, especially tablets, becomes ubiquitous, we must ensure that user privacy is protected and proper safeguards are in place so that consumers know if and when their personal information is being used and for what purpose. I look forward to hearing more from Amazon in response to these questions."

I’m surprised my little public service announcement irked you so, Walrus, or should I say, Mr.BEZOS!

Just got ours today and I have been impressed by it's speed, esp. with loading videos we've previously purchased on Amazon. Having other old-style Kindle purchases load right up was also a nice touch. The thing looks great, and is nice to handle.

I personally am waiting for a Windows 8 tablet because I want to be able to use it for content creation, but the Fire (which is a birthday present for my wife) is still pretty amazing for $199.

Kindle Fire will do well in the market. It is competitively priced, and boasts some very nice features. I think that people who use other Amazon services regularly will most likely purchase the Fire, most people who own Apple computers will choose the iPad. It just makes more sense to "keep everything in the family". People who have other Apple products, will find it easier to sync all of their music, apps, and other purchases on the same platform, where as people with Windows, and android powered phones will find it easier to sync everything with something like a Kindle.

I should have been more explicit: the point of selling things is to make money. As in, Android sells on the most smartphones but Apple makes over 50% of all the profits. Motorola about broke even.

In tablets, the point isn't whether Fire sells a lot, but the impact Fire has on profits for other Android tablet makers. I say "Android" because Apple is minting profits at current pricing for the iPad and the experience of other makers shows Apple's pricing is at least as good as they can do. So now as an Android tablet maker, you decide to go cheaper and sell a tablet for near what the Fire sells for. You may be making some money at that price, but not much. Your customers look at your product and the cheaper Fire, which is subsidized by Amazon's content sales. Other customers look up market and see Apple. So Apple gets the profits from selling devices and Amazon - we assume - gets profits from selling content. That squeezes everyone else.

It seems to me that Apple is still, and will for awhile, be dominating this product type. Even after Steve jobs passed Apple still seems to be doing exceptionally well, hopefully they will still be coming up with some new practical products in the future without him.
The Fire just doesn't seem as good as many of Apple's products in my opinion. It doesn't do as many things, it's blurry, and lags. Although, I can see the Silk internet browser to be something very new and innovative that could go somewhere. Also the fact that you can purchase apps from stores other than just the Amazon app store unlike Apple who makes you buy them from their app store only.
It seems they both have their pluses and minuses, we will just have to see how the competition between these two giant companies rolls out.

@Ruyliev: Given that your correspondent has been accuse of Amazon dislike in the past, perhaps that's a good response. The Nook tablet isn't a competitor, despite being an apparently well-made device with a good interface, because it lacks the full media infrastructure to compare directly with Apple.

Amazon is the only other firm besides Apple to have a full array of audio and video agreements with major and independent studios and labels. Barnes and Noble has books, periodicals, and some apps. It may have wonderful qualities, but cannot be discussed in the same market space as an iPad.